Of course what was really under discussion was British theatre's lack of diversity. Theatre is not just default white, it's default able-bodied, middle class and frequently predominantly male, too. The evidence is all around us: on our stages, in the corridors of power of our theatres and in the audience. We spend a lot of time making theatre for and with people who are just like us.

If we don't face up to this uncomfortable truth, things will only get worse, as arts education is devalued in schools and squeezed from the curriculum. The sum of £27,000 feels like too much debt to accumulate for a higher arts education or drama school training, and only those who can afford to undertake a series of unpaid internships ever get a shot at a career in the arts.

How far have we come since the 1980s, when colourblind casting started to be introduced? Not as far as we might like to think, given the Asian actor who spoke about being emailed to go for an audition and asked to bring his own turban. Or the black actor who only gets to audition to play gangsters and drug dealers. The question that kept being raised at D&D was: how do you work as an actor or artist, and not just as a black, Asian or East Asian actor or artist? As Eclipse theatre's Dawn Walton pointed out, there simply aren't enough stepping stones for non-white actors. It's one of the reasons why there is a talent drain to the US, a loss that makes British theatre poorer with every plane ticket purchased.

The situation for playwrights is no better. Would a theatre ever tell a white theatre-maker, approaching them with an idea for a show, that they've already had two white productions over the last 18 months so wouldn't want to programme any more white theatre?

Maybe more mindfulness from those in positions of power in our theatres could change that almost overnight. As the Royal Court's Vicky Featherstone pointed out, directors need to step up to the plate and question every casting decision that they make. The Gate's Christopher Haydon was honest about challenging and being aware about every one of his programming and casting decisions. It was good that they were both there. I know Open Space is very much built around the idea that the people who come are the right people to discuss the issues under consideration, and there is no point getting hung up on who isn't there. Nonetheless, I couldn't help thinking that the absence of representatives from many of our big, well-funded institutions reflects the fact that while they give lip service to diversity, their commitment doesn't really go much beyond ticking boxes and accessing the funding streams.

But change is crucial. At the No Boundaries symposium earlier in the week, Nii Sackey, the founder of Bigga Fish, put it very bluntly when he said: "Diversity, we don't have any." Sackey asked why the arts couldn't be less like Downton Abbey and more like the closing Olympic ceremony. He suggested that for change to happen we need to "get comfortable with our uncomfortableness" and get past the fact that it's always easier to talk to somebody who looks like you, sounds like you and comes from the same background as you. And employ them too.

As Sackey pointed out, there is real value in diversity. Different people generate different thinking. Difference is always interesting and seldom a threat. It may be disruptive, but the arts should always be open to disruption; it's what they do best. By being more open, democratic and equal, and by spreading opportunity more fairly, theatre may start not only to reflect the world in which we live, but also to help itself, by throwing off accusations of elitism. These are accusations that it will continue to attract until it proves itself willing to act and enact change.